From the Edges

Cartoons

The NIH Keeps Up With The Times: 1, 2,
3.
David Baltimore Has A Flashback: ***. The NY Times Keeps Up With Times: ***.
The Faith of Anthony Fauci: ***. Anthony Fauci Explains How HIV Causes AIDS: ***.
Robert Gallo on The Force of Ejaculation: ***, on HIV Theory: ***, Lectures in Marseilles: ***.
David Ho Does The Math: ***.
John Mellors Sets the Record Straight: ***.
Bono, el Magnifico, Holds (Another) Press Conference: ***.
Anthony Fauci Explains Journalism in the Age of AIDS: ***.
Anthony Fauci and David Ho Disprove an Old Adage: ***.
Anthony Fauci Explains ICL and AIDS: ***
The CDC Can't Keep Up With The Times:***
The Method of the "Small Inquisitor" Moore:***
The Co-Discovery of a Nobel-Worthy Enzymatic Activity:***
The Revenge of the "Very" Minor Moriarty:***
Julie Gerberding and Anthony Fauci Learn Arithmetic:***
Osama Obama Has a Message for Africa:***

November 06, 2006

The Censorious Professor Moore Writes to Discover Magazine

The man is an embarrassment even to AIDS, Inc. Today he "published" the letter below on the extremely unvisited Cornell University website that he laughingly calls AIDSTruth. Since we are magnanimous and concerned only with dissemination of hard dats, we feel obligated to make sure that as many thinking people as possible see these carefully chosen words by the single most unashamed spoksperson for the AIDS establishment. There can be no more perfect demonstration of how these self-styled owners of truth behave. [Otis]

"Nov. 6, 2006

To the editors,
Discover Magazine

I request that this letter be published as a registration of my
disgust at Discover magazine's publication of an interview with Celia
Farber.

I was saddened to see that a reputable, science-oriented publication
such as "Discover Magazine" has granted space to Celia Farber, to
allow her to promote her anti-science views. Ms Farber is a leading
member of a small clique of individuals (the "Rethinking AIDS" (sic)
group) who believe that HIV is not the cause of AIDS, or even that it
does not exist. As such, she is not a witness of events (the
traditional role of a journalist/writer), she is an active
participant in the activities she writes about; in other words, she
has a personal agenda, and one of those agendas is to increase the
sales of her recently published book on the subject. To draw an
analogy: would 'Discover Magazine" grant space to a leading member of
the Ku Klux Klan to promote a book he/she had written to advance the
"science" of Eugenics? I think not, because Eugenics is a concept
that is both offensive and scientifically discredited. Equally, Ms.
Farber's views have no basis in science, for not a single credible
scientist nowadays disputes the existence of HIV or its causative
role in AIDS. Her views are also offensive to the memories of the
millions of people who have now died of AIDS worldwide, and they are
disparaging to the efforts of the many thousands of scientists and
health care professionals who are working hard to alleviate and
prevent the suffering of HIV-infected people. Ms Farber castigates
these individuals as being, in effect, tools of the Pharmaceutical
Industry, motivated only by money and thoughts of glory. But she
seems perfectly willing to exploit her own professional connections
within the publishing industry to do anything she can to increase the
sales of her book, and thereby to make a profit from the dead and
dying. It's a shame that "Discover Magazine" has connived with that
obvious and morally reprehensible strategy. By doing so, it has done
a great disservice to the young scientists and students who have
relied on the magazine as part of their science education.

John Moore, PhD
Professor of Microbiology and Immunology
Weill Medical College of Cornell University, New York"

Our own Dr. Bialy also wrote to Discover Magazine when a not particularly flattering review of Ms. Farber's new book from Melville House appeared. You decide in whose seminar in critical thinking in molecular biology you want to enroll.

'Equally, Ms. Farber's views have no basis in science, for not a single credible scientist nowadays disputes the existence of HIV or its causative role in AIDS'

Of course, in your mind, such a statement is a tautology (I know it's a big word for you...it means roughly "a statement which is true simply by logical construction and definition"), given your previous public statements that anyone who doubts HIV is "by definition not a credible scientist".

But this has always been the orthodox tactic -- define everyone who doubts HIV as "not credible" and by definition no credible scientists doubts HIV. A fitting argument that must seem perfectly normal to you in the post-modern tautological sociological construct of "AIDS research".

'Ms Farber castigates these individuals as being, in effect, tools of the Pharmaceutical Industry, motivated only by money and thoughts of glory.'

Well, garden-variety stupidity has a lot to do with it, as well.

'But she seems perfectly willing to exploit her own professional connections within the publishing industry to do anything she can to increase the sales of her book, and thereby to make a profit from the dead and dying.'

Ah, yes... again, the "denialists are making millions off their racket" spiel. We're all rolling in the money, aren't we!!

'By doing so, it has done a great disservice to the young scientists and students who have relied on the magazine as part of their science education.'

I applaud Discover magazine for their interview of Farber (which was a much better job than the book review that appeared in print).

I actually hope your letter to Discover is widely read, as your arrogance and ego are now completely transparent in this diatribe.

Of course, such an audience could not come from your OWN "website", given the "clinically undetectable" handful of people who ever read aidstruth.org, see:

John "Intellectual Pee Wee" Moore's letter to Discover magazine contains an interesting confirmation of the principle that when a person accuses somebody else, and does so continuously and vociferously, quite frequently that person is referring to him/herself.

This idea is contained in the well known adage: Whenever you point a finger at another, you are pointing an arm at yourself.

Isn't it striking that of all things Moore accuses Celia Farber to be motivated by greed and glory?

Striking but logical. A person who sold out to the devil for the money and the glory can only think in terms of money and glory and, when in anger, knowing deep down in his little black heart that it's the works of $atan, accuses the other of the guilt that weighs so heavily on his soul.

Let go John. Beelzebub's presents only last for one earthly lifetime. After that you pay back for the rest of eternity.

And, in case you didn't know: Eternity is said to last very long, especially when you get near the end.

I have a GOOD idea for you poor, bespotted prof. Moore. Why don't you DO A DURBAN? Get ALL your friends, starting with your mentors, "intellectual powerhouse", David Ho, and the princely pair of thieves, David Baltimore, and Bob Gallo?

Your letter is so pathetic that even they won't sign it. But you can TRY to collect a bunch of signatures, and I promise we will publish the entire list here.

Could anything be more fair Mr. Moore?

Addendum Post Brown: Far be it from me to be cruel like MY mentor Bialy, but I can't help notice that when I type "Hank Barnes" into Google, of approximately 1,200,000 possible returns, YBYL is No. 1, and has been so for a couple of weeks. I suppose if one types "AIDSTruth.org" your site will return as the first hit too. However, typing "John P. Moore" returns approximately 32,000,000 possibilities of which you are indeed the first few, although considering what they are, I would hope that no one Googled me, if I were you, which thanks to all the gods and goddesses I am not, never was and if I keep my nose relatively clean, never will be (at least that's what Bialy says).

I am an old man and this is the first time I have actually enjoyed myself reading this weblog without the sick feeling in my stomach that often accompanied the comments of what Otis now calls "the pod squad".

In line with what Dr. Brown has pointed out, I would like to ask Prof. Moore if by his own logic he would therefore discount the following people as credible scientists, since each of them has expressed reservations about his favorite, 25 year and still unproved hypothesis.

George writes "still unproved hypothesis". George is a gentleman of the old school. I am a turk of the generational inheritors (as few as we seem to be) of the tradition belonging to the names Delbruck, Chargaff, Jacob et al., and so I feel compelled to rewrite that courteous phrasing, to which these impostors are not deserving, by the more x-plicit: "totally disproved hypothesis" as two hours at the AIDS WIKI will convince.

I'm delighted that your fellow AIDS denialists buy your book (or more likely that you buy up copies to give away to them, an old trick to boost circulation figures). Anyone with any understanding of the economics of closed systems would know that the only people making money out of such schemes are Amazon.com and the USPS......... After all, one AIDS denialist giving money to another is just the same as a member of the KKK making a donation to the Aryan Brotherhood or the Nazi Party."

My reply contained a few obscenities, and also pointed out that among all the distasteful characters I have had to come in contact in 20+ years of questioning HIV/AIDS, he takes the cake as the most distasteful, stupid and easily manipulated -- with no second place even in sight.

"Goof [sic] to hear from you again, Revolver@ [sic] ...... I'm really pleased I got right up your collective noses! And I'm delighted you read AIDSTruth so avidly, to improve your knowledge of things that matter (or should). Together with the latest news on our complete and crushing victory over you loonies where it really matters, South Africa, a victory that has a great deal to do with the AIDSTruth site, the multi-signatory letter from AIDS scientists to Mbeki that I organized, and with Mark Wainberg's speech at Toronto (a good friend of mine), your hysterical response to my letter has made my week - it's always pleasing to annoy you people. When you read a few articles from rather more respected science and political writers than your buddy, Celia, that will be published in the coming months in major outlets, you'll no doubt contact with me again with something else I can chuckle at. Until then, continue to fester fruitlessly in your pointless little world. John"

To which I responded:

">>Goof to hear from you again, Revolver@......

'Goof to hear from you', too, jpm2003@.

>>I'm really pleased I got right up your collective noses! And I'm delighted you read AIDSTruth so avidly,

I do not read AIDSTruth 'avidly'. There's so little new information (if you can call it that) uploaded there regularly, it takes almost no time to keep up with.

>>>the multi-signatory letter from AIDS scientists to Mbeki that I organized,

Yes, I saw your 'mini-Durban Declaration'. You must have 'declaration envy'. If only you spent a small fraction of your time responding to scientific points, as you do assembling religious declarations and proclamations.

>>>and with Mark Wainberg's speech at Toronto (a good friend of mine),

Wainberg...is that the same guy who called dissidents 'perpetrators of death' who should be thrown in jail, and who called Duesberg a 'scientific psychopath'? [see The Other Side of AIDS] I should have guessed you two would get along well.

>>When you read a few articles from rather more respected science and political writers than your buddy, Celia, that will be published in the coming months in major outlets, you'll no doubt contact with me again with something else I can chuckle at.

I doubt it... I only 'contact you' after being moved by your uniquely eloquent and articulate style of writing, which other 'respected science and political writers' cannot come close to emulating.

I was just checking the Alexa rankings for YBYL. In case anyone is unfamiliar with Alexa, it is a service that ranks websites via users with a toolbar:

From Wikipedia:

"Alexa ranks sites based on visits from users of its Alexa Toolbar which is only available for Internet Explorer and must be manually installed. A third-party extension for Mozilla Firefox called SearchStatus was made available in May 2006; it allows users of this browser to view Google and Alexa rankings of a visited site and thereby also affect Alexa rankings.... Alexa provides an important, useful, and, for most websites, also independent source of information about website traffic."

The lower the ranking, the better. The ranking for YBYL has jumped from 2,646,051 to 867,718 in less than one month. This is a phenomenal jump in such a short period of time.

Here are some specifics from today. Until now, this post devoted to the wisdom of JPMoore has attracted 537 independent visits, from 28 countries, and 32% of the visitors are from /.edu(s), and 8% from /.gov(s).

Considering that his own site (AIDSTruth.org) continues to stagnate around the "clinically undetectable" rank of 4,500,000, I think that me and the entire staff of YBYL deserve a BIG thank you from John for making sure that so many have had the chance to read his inspired words, and so many more will.

How bout it John, do I get a thank you here? You write at the drop of an email to *everybody* else.

Attacking John Moore, David Ho and David Baltimore is truly outrageous. But it's no where as offensive as your promotion of mental-diarrhea (or HIV denialism) that causes death.

http://www.aidstruth.org
is not run by Cornell.
it was founded by a partnership of people, including members of the TAC, which the NYT called "the world's most effective AIDS organization" on August 30th.

I fully agree. It *would* be impossible to list the respected scientists who think my heroes, Delbruck, Chargaff, Jacob, and the others that Dr. Stock might add to his etc. above are idiots.

The problem is including W & G in that category.

As for the list you refer to: These are hardly heroes of mine young sir. However, your assertion is still probably correct. And you will note please, that I did not attribute any heretical positions to any in the list, only that they questioned your gospel.